No Smoke Detectors – No Fire Sprinklers – No 24 Hour Security Patrol to Detect Fires Early – No Technology – No Security Cameras – Not Even a Webcam – there's More Security at a 7-Eleven – No Nothin' – No One Will Buy Your House Now Either – "Remember there's Another Hangar Too"!
Remember Nancy Pelosi’s famous line that Democrats had to pass ObamaCare to learn what was in it? Democrats in Sacramento are now having second thoughts about a law they passed two years ago that would effectively establish a second progressive income tax in California.
Democrats last week introduced legislation to repeal a 2022 budget bill that authorized the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to restructure electricity rates by imposing a fixed charge on an income-graduated basis. The budget bill’s purpose was to reduce the state’s skyrocketing rates for lower-income people and shift utility costs to higher earners.
Average residential rates for investor-owned utility customers have surged by 72% to 127% over the past 10 years. About 2.5 million households are behind on their bills, averaging $733 in arrears.
One culprit is the state’s aggressive green-energy buildout, which has required batteries to back up intermittent solar and wind. Another is the state’s net-metering program, which generously compensates households with solar panels for excess power they send to the grid. This has shifted costs for maintaining the grid to homes without solar panels.
Lawmakers have also shifted state government costs for wildfire mitigation and climate subsidies to utilities so the politicians can devote more spending to their public-union friends. At the same time the state has mandated that utilities provide discounts to lower-income customers. These discounts get baked into higher rates for all customers.
The climate lobby frets that soaring electricity rates will discourage low- and middle-income Californians from buying electric vehicles (though they are also an inducement to install solar panels). Thus, Gov. Gavin Newsom two years ago pressured the Legislature to pass the budget bill to establish the nation’s first income-based electricity rates.
“This is a crappy budget trailer bill that was dumped on us late Sunday,” Democratic Assembly Rep. Al Muratsuchi said at the time. The bill nonetheless passed overwhelmingly. Now Democrats in affluent areas are hearing from constituents who are irate that their electricity bills could soon climb even more.
The PUC hasn’t finalized the new electric rate structures. But Pacific Gas & Electric Company has floated charging customers fixed fees ranging from $15 a month for those earning less than $28,000 annually and up to $92 a month for those making $180,000 or more. Income-based charges on higher earners will rise as utility costs do.
Ten state Senators recently sent a letter urging the PUC to reject utilities’ proposed income charges. “Californians already pay some of the highest electric bills in the nation and should not be forced to arbitrarily pay more to cover for a private utility’s poor business decisions,” San Francisco progressive Sen. Scott Wiener declared.
No—they will be forced to pay more to compensate for Sacramento’s bad policy decisions. The progressive epiphany in Sacramento is welcome, belated as it may be. Maybe California isn’t completely lost.
City leaders are pleading for more help from the state and federal government to support cleanup efforts in the fallout from the massive hangar fire that broke out almost a month ago at the closed Marine Corps Air Station Tustin.
“We need the Navy to not only step up in terms of funding, but in terms of actively leading the recovery effort,” Mayor Austin Lumbard said Tuesday. “The city has filled the void in the interim, but now that the fire is extinguished, we’re really looking for the Navy to take ownership of their property and their recovery leadership.”
Officials said the city has depleted what it could take from its reserves to fund asbestos testing and cleanup in the public and residential areas surrounding the burnt northern hangar and are counting on other government agencies to step up.
Cleanup costs are expected to be in the tens of millions for addressing in the surrounding neighborhoods. Lumbard called the $1 million the Navy committed early on “grossly insufficient.”
Navy officials on Wednesday said the service has been working with the city since day one of the fire and in no way is shirking its responsibilities or its share of funding.
“We are working on an amendment to an agreement to provide additional funding,” said Chris Dunne, a Navy spokesman. “We knew the $1 million wasn’t going to do it. The Navy fully intends to support what the city is doing and fund that to the fullest amount we can.”
Dunne acknowledged that setting up the funding agreement has taken weeks, but expects more money to make its way to the city in days. Officials are now figuring out the Navy’s financial responsibility and what will be covered, he said.
“It’s just one of those tedious processes of getting the language just right and trying to remember through this whole process that we’re talking about people and the community and taking care of people and not getting too bogged down in process at a time when the help is needed,” Dunne said.
The City Council on Tuesday asked to continue efforts to pressure local, state and federal officials for help with the response. City leaders are also asking for additional health guidance from the county health agency. Residents have peppered local leaders with questions about what is and isn’t safe to do in and around their homes, such as walking dogs or using outdoor barbecue pits.
All the councilmembers echoed the calls for help. Councilmember Letitia Clark implored the county public health director for clearer answers about “simple things.”
When asked Wednesday for comment, a representative of the OC Health Care Agency sent a link to Tustin’s North hangar fire community resource page.
Clark said the emergency is not over and the city still needs help from higher levels of government.
“There were a lot of promises made that we would have that support and it’s kind of dwindled as time has gone by,” Clark said.
Tustin declared a local emergency on Nov. 10 and the county followed up with its own on Nov. 13. Both times the city and county each asked the governor to declare a state of emergency.
“The governor has yet to act,” Lumbard said. “We are committed to getting that state help that we ultimately need to free up some resources for our recovery.”
Since the fire’s outbreak, the Navy has deferred to the city for what the next steps are, Dunne said, because “the Navy is not equipped to handle this type of response compared to what local officials can do.”
Regarding the hangar footprint, the Navy will lead the cleanup there and hire experts and contractors. While no exact timeline has been set for that, Dunne said he expects that to happen “in the next few weeks.”
“We’ll look at what needs to be deconstructed from the site and removed all the debris,” he said, adding that at present a product that seals the debris in place has been put over the site to “create a crust.”
Work is expected to begin Thursday, Dec. 7, to take down the 120-foot tall hangar doors that remain standing, officials said. Cranes and rigging have already been set up around the hangar and removing the doors will take about two weeks.
After the fire was confirmed completely extinguished on Dec. 1, the Orange County Fire Authority stepped down from leading the Incident Management Team and disaster recovery contractors from Innovative Emergency Management will now lead the team.
Colin Cummings, an official with IEM, said during a presentation to the City Council Tuesday that debris will not be removed from the site during door deconstruction.
“The Navy will be responsible for all debris removals from (the) incident site, and is working to assign a contractor at this time to perform that work,” Cummings said. “When the Navy is ready to start taking that material off the incident site, we will be increasing (air) monitoring just because of all the additional risks of breaking that material apart, and removing it into those containers and taking it off site.”
The Navy has yet to explain how it plans to address remediation on the entire site, Lumbard said. Air monitoring will remain active surrounding the hangar until the site has been completely cleaned by the Navy.
Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, who represents Tustin, sent a letter on Tuesday to the Navy asking for an update on its efforts and if it would commit to expanding debris cleanup and reimbursing people who have paid for asbestos remediation out of pocket.
The city on Wednesday hosted its first community Zoom meeting to provide updates on recovery efforts. OCFA Division Chief Scott Wiedensohler said in the meeting that more than 60% of the surrounding community has been cleaned up as of Dec. 1.
Future community meetings will be 10 a.m. on Wednesdays. Residents are asked to send new questions and requests regarding the hangar fire to [email protected].
Tustin residents watched in horror last week as one of the two hangars left from former Marine Corps Air Station Tustin burned to the ground, dumping 80-year-old asbestos into the air that local health agencies didn’t notify them about for days.
But this isn’t the first time public agencies have failed to inform Tustin residents about the health dangers of living next to a former marine air base.
A Voice of OC investigation found the U.S. Navy sent out identical letters to three homeowners associations near the base in Nov. 2021, notifying them that the groundwater under their homes could be contaminated with toxic runoff from the base and that they planned to do more studies.
But those letters never actually made it into the hands of dozens of residents who Voice of OC spoke with, and in multiple cases the homeowners associations deny ever receiving the letters in the first place or won’t speak about them.
City leaders have largely avoided talking about the issue, saying it’s not their responsibility to clean up the base and that the drinking water is safe because it’s imported from the Irvine Ranch Water District.
Two years after those letters, it’s still unclear how contaminated the land under those homes is because the Navy hasn’t finished their studies, leaving over 10,000 residents living on and next to the base in the dark on whether or not their groundwater is safe.
What Was Dumped at the Base?
The letters from the Navy warned residents their groundwater could be contaminated with polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals,” because they take so long to break down.
Those chemicals are associated with cancer, liver damage, decreased fertility, and increased risk of asthma and thyroid disease, according to the Center for Disease Control.
“The Navy has identified at least one (area of interest) that is located on or near your property. While there are no known immediate risks to human health or the environment, the Navy is proactively investigating (areas of interest),” wrote Kyle Olewnik, the then-Base Realignment and Closure Environmental Coordinator for the Navy, in the letter. “To that end, the Navy is currently preparing work plans outlining the initial investigation of soil and additional investigation of groundwater.”
The letter came after the Navy was sued in 2019 because it withheld documents about how bad the contamination was.
Sampling for forever chemicals at the site began in 2017.
People can be exposed to forever chemicals by drinking exposed water or swallowing contaminated soil according to the CDC. Long-term exposure can lead to various cancers, alongside health consequences for children and fetuses.
Christopher Kim, a professor and environmental geochemist at Chapman University, described forever chemicals as “regulated chemicals” that “have documented adverse health outcomes in humans.”
“Levels above regulatory limits,” he continued, “Represent a potential risk to residents, although the degree of risk depends on their actions.”
There’s also no question on if chemicals were dumped at the base, including through burn pits, storage tank leaks and just dumping things like leftover jet fuel over the side of the runway.
“The general practice was to dump the substances on the ground, bury them, or in more recent years dispose of them in burn pits,” said Chapman Environmental Law Professor Denis Binder.
Who’s In Charge of the Cleanup?
Tustin leaders claim they’re not responsible for any of the cleanup and are waiting on the Navy to get their house in order.
“The City is not the lead on remediation at former MCAS Tustin,” said Tustin senior management analyst Kenneth Piguee in a Dec. 2022 email, saying clean-up responsibility was on the Navy. “The City reviews all reports and work plans.”
An August 2022 report from Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Southwest showed groundwater contamination levels far exceeding safe levels set by the federal government at several locations on the former Marine base.
Despite the report, Navy officials said they have no idea how much groundwater pollution has spread outside of the base’s footprint.
Officials also don’t have a firm date by which they’ll finish sampling the water.
The Navy is awaiting approval of a proposed work plan that involves primarily drilling new groundwater wells, taking additional groundwater samples, taking initial soil samples, and assessing the ecological risk forever chemicals could pose.
They hope to start implementing the plan in late 2024.
Off-base groundwater sampling is not in the current work plan proposal.
The Navy follows CERCLA regulations, an EPA act that outlines procedures for responding to hazardous substances released into the environment.
Forever chemicals are currently not a controlled substance under the act, but are expected to be added in 2024, wrote Navy spokesperson Elizabeth Roddy in a statement.
Although the chemicals are known to be contaminating the groundwater in the area, the drinking water servicing the communities comes from Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) and contains no detectable levels of these chemicals.
Who Was Supposed to Tell the Residents?
Since the base’s closure in 1999, most of the land it sat on has been converted into various housing developments, dubbed the Tustin Legacy project.
Not one of the dozens of residents Voice of OC interviewed in neighborhoods recalled receiving Nov. 2021 letter from the Navy.
Navy officials didn’t tell residents directly, instead sending a warning letter to three homeowners associations – Columbus Square, Greenwood and Anton Legacy – which all sit on the site of the former base.
None of the managers of these neighborhoods acknowledge having received it in interviews.
Columbus Square Manager Holly Dawson refused to say whether her homeowners’ association received or distributed the letter to its residents, but Voice of OC confirmed warning about the land being still in remediation was in the homebuyers disclosure as early as 2008.
Greenwood staff member Nathan Straiter said the person to whom the Navy’s 2021 letter was addressed left the company in 2019. It appears that the Navy sent the letter to an email address that hadn’t been in use for two years.
Straiter said he has no knowledge of any of his colleagues having ever received information regarding the forever chemicals.
No one at Anton Legacy knew anything about the issue.
The city of Tustin has one page on their website about the cleanup.
Navy-led meetings discussing forever chemicals cleanup are advertised on the Navy’s website and in both the LA Times and OC Register. The meetings are held twice a year at the Tustin Senior Center.
Despite this advertising, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Manager Patricia Hannon recalled only a couple of residents, if any, at previous meetings.
The Navy will not contact homeowners directly unless there is a need to sample on their property according to Navy spokesperson Elizabeth Roddy and Remedial Project Manager Chris Ota.
Ota said the earliest they can expect to notify property owners is spring of 2024.
How Did Local Leaders Respond?
After the hangar fire, Orange County’s political core swung into action.
Tustin Mayor Austin Lumbard called on the Navy to immediately clean up the wreckage.
“We will be demanding the Navy’s immediate attention and resources are provided for site cleanup and further demolition,” Lumbard wrote in a statement last Wednesday.
County Supervisor Don Wagner, chair of the board and Tustin’s representative, declared a countywide state of emergency over the fire.
Ten representatives, including Tustin’s Congresswoman Young Kim, sent a letter to the Navy demanding answers on the hangar fire and asking for residents to be informed what was being done to clean up the debris.
But when asked repeatedly about the issues with groundwater, it was a much different response.
The city manager, the city clerk and every city council member outside the mayor wouldn’t speak on it. Kim refused to respond to repeated requests for information, and Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris had no comment.
Starting in February, Chapman students called and emailed the city manager six times, the city clerk five times, city council members three or four times each, Rep. Kim six times, Assemblymember Petrie-Norris three times, and state Senator Dave Min four times.
Those who did respond, including Tustin Communications Manager Stephanie Najera and Roddy, failed to identify any imminent plans to directly inform residents about the presence of dangerous chemicals beneath their property.
Wagner said the county has nothing to do with the issue, but that they are “monitoring” the situation.
Lumbard didn’t respond to 13 requests for comment over the past year, but agreed to speak to the issue on Monday afternoon in the wake of the ongoing north hangar fire, adding that he’d been made aware of the issue when he purchased a home in Columbus Square and another in Greenwood from developers.
While he praised the city’s webpage about the issue, he said it wasn’t their responsibility to inform homeowners, and that when the city approved developments on or near the former base they did it away from the worst of the pollution sites.
“But ultimately it’s the Navy’s obligation and once it’s owned by a developer it’s their obligation as well,” Lumbard said. “I was fully informed and the builders I purchased my home from fully disclosed it.”
He also noted that he had never received the HOA letter from the Navy.
“Our developers are very transparent about the risks in the soil and what’s prohibited or not,” he said. “There’s probably room for further communication on the Navy’s front.”
Hangar Fire - "Without Litigation" - City of Tustin Already On the Hook for $90 Million in Clean-Up Costs - "Not Including the Actual Hangar Property" - and Heading for a Billion Dollars - Developers Likely Not Off the Hook Either - Property Value Assessments Undergoing Official Review - Ask Yourself - Would You Buy or Rent at the Tustin Legacy - Remember there's "Another" Hangar Too Addicted? 1-800-662-HELP URGENT REMINDER - if You're on Southern California Edison's - "Time to Fuck You" - "Electricity Rate Plan" - "Opt Out Now" - Call Today or Visit the Website - 1-800-810-2369
